IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Pinyin

"David Starner" <prosfilaes@gmail.com> Wed, 24 September 2008 19:50 UTC

Return-Path: <prosfilaes@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6244F39E68D for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:50:48 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LSL7GniTe9tx for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:50:47 +0200 (CEST)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.6.8
Received: from pechora5.lax.icann.org (pechora5.icann.org [208.77.188.40]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43A5839E498 for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:50:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rv-out-0708.google.com [209.85.198.250]) by pechora5.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m8OJouFZ010782 for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:51:16 -0700
Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c5so56400rvf.28 for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:50:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.29.8 with SMTP id g8mr3700107rvj.62.1222285855751; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:50:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.37.2 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:50:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <6d99d1fd0809241250k18a51b12p7b13d313d3eb41a3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:50:55 -0400
From: David Starner <prosfilaes@gmail.com>
To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: Pinyin
In-Reply-To: <4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA014C26B041@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <83C5E5CB-FE27-47BA-A98F-F5003F586A64@evertype.com> <006e01c91e68$9e4abce0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <20080924172101.GU19886@mercury.ccil.org> <6d99d1fd0809241042g44eba0e8q613989437a958ee@mail.gmail.com> <20080924190502.GD11053@mercury.ccil.org> <6d99d1fd0809241226k384e9a11h41ebae090bb1b8d6@mail.gmail.com> <4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA014C26B041@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.93.3, clamav-milter version 0.93.3 on pechora5.lax.icann.org
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora5.lax.icann.org [208.77.188.40]); Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:51:16 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: "ietf-languages@iana.org" <ietf-languages@iana.org>, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Language tag discussions <ietf-languages.alvestrand.no>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:50:48 -0000

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison@amazon.com> wrote:
> The guiding principle in forming language tags is to "tag content wisely." Wisdom, of course takes different forms, but 'km', 'es', and 'pqm' are almost certainly better tag choices than ones that include dubious region subtags if one is not familiar enough to know if a regional distinction applies (or not).

es-US is going to be very distinct from es-SP, and it's likely to
matter for the listeners. The distinction between ar-SA versus ar-MA
is also likely to matter for listeners. If one is not familiar enough
to know whether a regional distinction applies, and one knows that the
users are going to be unhappy if it's not made in places where it
needs to be, I think it should be made.

As for the ongoing discussion, there is data tagged zh-TW, and when
that data is romanized into Hanyu Pinyin, it will be very natural to
tag it zh-TW-pinyin, and I see it hard to argue that's formally wrong.
So zh-TW(-Latn)-pinyin can't be trusted to be Tongyong Pinyin.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email